Be interesting to see if PB comes back on here with some solid stats. I would have thought there would be some mandatory government requirement for this type of data tracking in all institutions.

And also, do places like PB get 'inspected'?

PB certainly market themselves well. If I was young and naive wanting a career in 'the music business' I'd find their courses appealing cos it looks like getting a job after 'graduating' is dead easy.

Who knows, if I had done a PB course all them years ago maybe it wouldn't have took me 4 years at the RCM, 2 years doing a masters and then 15 years of working me b*****s off to get to where I am now.

Maybe I just didn't realize how easy it was/is!

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

Added to that, we aren't allowed, by law, to pick and choose who we allow to advertise in the magazine, other than for reasons of space/cost, even if we wanted to....

---

Bit of a diversion, but what law's that then? Will you carry an ad for the porn film I made on the quiet? Must the Catholic Herald advertise abortion services? Some local newspapers carry small ads for "personal services" and some don't. Surely that's a result of an editorial decision?

I'm not taking issue with SOS advertising colleges: it's a free market. I'm just interested in the legal point.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Quote Music Manic:

---

I like your truth and honesty Narcoman.

---

and my razor-like wit? AND MY RAZOR-LIKE WIT???!!! no?

oh...

Quote Steve Hill:

---

I'm not taking issue with SOS advertising colleges: it's a free market. I'm just interested in the legal point.

---

I'm not a lawyer -- it's what I was told after a very unpleasant event many years ago in which an advertiser was refused and took legal action. I presume if you decide to refuse an advertiser you need to have good and defensible grounds... and deep enough pockets to defend your argument.

Hugh

--------------------
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound

Quote Sue Dunnim:

---

Be interesting to see if PB comes back on here with some solid stats.

---

I doubt they even have any! They are a private company, just as we are and as a studio, I can assure you that we do not keep stats on demos for start-up bands that have made it all the way to contracts and a gig at the O2 - though at the moment we do have two that have done that, but oh so many that have not! (Though, I would not be surprised if that were to be two more than they have had engineers working at the O2!)

Quote Sue Dunnim:

---

I would have thought there would be some mandatory government requirement for this type of data tracking in all institutions.

---

Nope! It is a totally private service, not accredited by any government body or recognised university, so it is pretty much the same as a flower shop or a some local computer servicing company.

Quote Sue Dunnim:

---

And also, do places like PB get 'inspected'?

---

H&S only, as far as I am aware.

Quote Sue Dunnim:

---

PB certainly market themselves well. If I was young and naive wanting a career in 'the music business' I'd find their courses appealing cos it looks like getting a job after 'graduating' is dead easy.

---

I have had a few CVs from PB alumni and they are especially useless, as there just do not seem to be any minimum entry requirements, yet, after just two years, give their 'graduates' a piece of paper with the word 'Diploma' written on the top.

It reminds me of Neddy Seagoon giving Bluebottle a piece of paper with the word 'Five Shillings' written on it, or Eccles having a piece of paper with the words 'eight o'clock' written on it, so that he could tell the time.

But when Bluebottle held the piece of paper to his ear, he cried out "Here! This piece of paper's stopped! You been sold a forgery!"

as for inspection of courses
Publicly funded institutions get inspected by OFSTED on their courses, you can go on OFSTED's site to get details of how these inspections are run. - a quick google of OFSTED and University gives a long list of the ofsted inspections of various unis...
Private institutions in the main don't, unless they run courses accredited by publicly funded institutions -
looking at the ads in the back of this months SOS one can see that the SAE institute for example has "practical diploma's" (whatever they are??) to Bachelor degrees. Because there are (thankfully) very few private institutions that have awarding powers - there is a list here of institutions recognised by the westminster, scottish and welsh governments as having award giving status - private colleges have to have their degree's validated by an award enabling institution - in SEA's case the Uni of Middlesex...who will be OFSTED inspected....but not their own "Awards" - which can be awarded to anyone they like!

It is interesting to see a number of "manufacturer" awards creeping into education - Apple, Steinberg, Ableton etc etc awarding "institutions" some form of Education status tied to their products - certified training centres - certified by whom exactly???.....these are also not publicly checked by a government body - and there awards are also not officially (government) recognised.

The arguments in education regarding Academies, Private colleges and private uni's and the governments apparent willingness to de-regulate award giving powers to such institutions and/or companies is an interesting one - just to say as an accredited holder of official qualifications (such as a degree and QTS) and 'unofficial' ones from other companies - my 'proper' qualifications are the ones that entitle me to teach and to have my work recognised as correct and relevant (and OFSTED inspected)....the others are really just fairy dust that make me feel better - and to some extent are used by the companies that gave them to me as a promotional tool. It's the degree and the teacher status that I am most proud of, is most relevant to my work and the award no-one can say I didn't deserve/take away from me.


I worry (as many many teachers/lecturers etc etc) do about the state of our educational system. We do need to keep a check on what we teach and how we teach it....we need standards that employers understand and can judge people by and qualifications that are recognised as a certain standard of education....otherwise we hoodwink those that have worked very hard for them.

I would prefer Point Blank to get some proper accreditation for their courses.....and I would worry about being an International student at a non-accredited institution - both for grants etc etc from my country (do the Republic of Ireland give grants to students still??) and for visa requirements.

--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/seaapes

Interesting read Wease!

Could I, for example, start a diploma in 'Music Production'? If there's no law against it I could do this online. My CV is quite good. I've done some teaching many moons ago. I could charge a few hundred quid couldn't I? I'd need a catchy title tho...

'Close Range' perhaps. Close Range Audio Production!!!

Crikey!! What a great idea. I could advertise in SOS and get some promotional T-Shirts printed with the acronym emblazoned across the front.

Quote Sue Dunnim:

---

Interesting read Wease!

Could I, for example, start a diploma in 'Music Production'? If there's no law against it I could do this online. My CV is quite good. I've done some teaching many moons ago. I could charge a few hundred quid couldn't I? I'd need a catchy title tho...

'Close Range' perhaps. Close Range Audio Production!!!

Crikey!! What a great idea. I could advertise in SOS and get some promotional T-Shirts printed with the acronym emblazoned across the front.

---

Sure. It's only the modern equivalent of hanging up a sign: "Piano Lessons Given", or writing a series of books. Some places in America you might need a licence (which is more about "jobs for the boys" than "protect the public"). Market it well, price it right, you could be successful.

I'm not sure if "diploma" has any legal meaning. But you could call it something else.

Quote narcoman:

---

Quote Music Manic:

---

I like your truth and honesty Narcoman.

---

and my razor-like wit? AND MY RAZOR-LIKE WIT???!!! no?

oh...

---

Oh yeah!... and your gillette mach3 like wit!

>I'm fairly sure that reputable institutions actually do try to carry out this research. They actually employ people to keep track of alumni.

Many top Universities (such as the one I am involved with) do have online stats about the jobs their graduates do. These stats are quite hard to compile -- at least in cases where they aren't cooked up in the way Crying Chic observed -- and they aren't particularly accurate, but they give a flavour. (But I'm talking about traditional courses, not music tech courses.)

For those people who want government accreditation of University-type courses -- forget it. Believe me, I have seen plenty of these sorts of audits over the years, seen thousands of man-hours wasted on them and they are a complete waste of time, and bear no relation to the quality of the course, which is why the teaching quality audits were eventually axed. Hardly any academics take them seriously and for good reason. Government inspections are rarely a good solution to complex issues.

Edited by Scramble (27/08/11 03:05 PM)

I think this is going off topic somewhat..and the arguments regarding the state of education should be in off topic
but - i do disagree with scramble
in fact - the Russell Group, 1994 group, University Alliance and Million plus were established by institutions to represent their various members interests to government.....the Russell group to differenciate themselves from the "New" universities that were being set-up - and to state they were the top 20 uni's in research, the 1994 group to do the same (the next level research uni's), the university alliance for the business providers and the million plus for the rest....much like the Ivy League etc etc in the states....

ANY institution that receives public funding has to be accountable.....and now that we have an influx of education providers, these groups will find themselves having to be more accountable to government....and the tax payer....scramble may not like it, but I think he's going to be very busy justifying his uni's fees both to the students they attact AND to the government, who are going to be stumping up the money initially.

i don't really like OFSTED....it's a pain in the arse, a difficult period for the staff and students in my school and in some ways has a negative impact to my teaching.....but if OFSTED don't inspect.....how does anyone know if I'm doing my job or not?

Universities rely on their reputation to attract students and therefore funding - if their is no independent benchmark - how do they differentiate? - they may want to do it themselves - but then how and why should we differentiate between, lets say, Point blank and the SAE institute
I've seen a lot of posts in the past on the forums saying that the Tonmeister course is the only one to go on....why is this? - who decided? - the industry? the employeer? -= how do they know that the tonmeister course is the best?> - cause it hits a certain standard - regulated by independent bodies. - Thus Universities ALREADY judge themselves by certain standards - that are recognised AND Arbitrated to a certain extent by government - (the Russell group is made of the top 20 unis WHO RECEIVE THE MOST RESEARCH GRANT MONEY FROM THE GOVERNMENT)

if the Taxpayer is asked to pay - then they'll (the Unis) have to justify their tax money received...and the taxpayer pays the government to check and maintain standards - as they do the NHS, Armed forces, Police, Utility providers etc etc etc. Higher Education establishments better get used to hitting certain standards if they want the money - just as colleges and schools have to.

Anyway - thats off-topic....in the case of Point Blank there is little to differentiate them from let's say David Etheridge's offerings (found on the page opposite) - except for the big flashy ad - and maybe the false promises offered (by point blank) - or the real promises offered by them - I don't know - there seems very little qualification backup to justify the last statement. Their (Point blank's) list of course tutors and equipment is the only real differentiation.... There is no government approved awarding body offering a recognised standard of education (ie a degree award) - which to me would seem a vital pre-requisite for parting with any cash.

If we actually want to keep higher education relevant, then Higher education needs to standardise it's diplomas, certificates and degrees, and that'll have to be done by those that pay for it...which is the government - via loans for the fees, research grants etc etc etc....

the money comes from the taxpayer first - the taxpayer's gonna want to see results - or at least a standard of education received by the students from the institution - much like it does from schools.

Interestingly all uni's require a set standard from their entrants - A-levels are only issued by 3 GOVERNMENT APPOINTED STATUTORY REGULATORY BODIES.....for uni's to insist their intake have qualifications/grading equivalent 'points' from these regulatory bodies and then refuse to be regulated for the awards they issue themselves is kinda hypocritical

Unless of course we want to go back to the old days of money buys education -

but i always believe good quality, regulated and accountable education is a right - not a privilege...and is a right for all, regardless of wealth and background.

--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/seaapes

Quote Wease:

---

Unless of course we want to go back to the old days of money buys education -

but i always believe good quality, regulated and accountable education is a right - not a privilege...and is a right for all, regardless of wealth and background.

---

Your belief won't change the fact that we're back there already. Buy education if you have the money, if you're a member of the "deserving poor" queue up for a few scholarships.

>ANY institution that receives public funding has to be accountable.....

That's fine in principle. In practise, a government audit is an expensive waste of time, as even the government eventually came to see with the QAA.

>scramble may not like it, but I think he's going to be very busy justifying his uni's fees both to the students they attact

I don't have any problem justifying fees to the students. We've done that for years anyway.

>AND to the government, who are going to be stumping up the money initially.

Er... the government have been paying all the money for decades anyway. And we've been justifying ourselves to the government for decades anyway.

>Universities rely on their reputation to attract students and therefore funding - if their is no independent benchmark - how do they differentiate?

As you just said yourself, their reputation. (Not that reputation is that reliable a guide, but it's more reliable than a government inspection, which does nothing but push around millions of bits of paper with tick-boxes on them).

> - they may want to do it themselves - but then how and why should we differentiate between, lets say, Point blank and the SAE institute

People have no problem choosing products themselves in millions of other areas in life without the government holding their hands. If I was to choose between SAE and PB I certainly wouldn't bother looking at any government reports. I'd do things like looking at what people in the industry say about them, visiting them, etc.

>I've seen a lot of posts in the past on the forums saying that the Tonmeister course is the only one to go on....why is this? - who decided? - the industry? the employeer? -= how do they know that the tonmeister course is the best?> - cause it hits a certain standard - regulated by independent bodies.

No, no-one recommends Tonmeister because it hits some official standard. They judge it by its output, or by what they have heard about the courses from people who have been on them.

>if the Taxpayer is asked to pay - then they'll (the Unis) have to justify their tax money received...

??? The taxpayer has been paying for Universities for decades anyway! In theory the non-University attending taxpayer will now be paying less than before (in theory anyway), so the idea now is that there is less need for governmental control, with more power handed to the consumer.

>Higher Education establishments better get used to hitting certain standards if they want the money - just as colleges and schools have to.

Er, like I've had to say a number of times, our money previously came from the government, and we've been justifying ourselves with endless government reviews and audits for a long time.

My observation -- which may seem self-interested, but I would maintain it even if I left academia -- is that government reviews are an expensive waste of time. That applies to most government reviews. I don't, for example, trust the government to keep the hospitals in shape any more than I trust them to keep the Universities in shape.

Quote Wease:

---

ANY institution that receives public funding has to be accountable.....and now that we have an influx of education providers, these groups will find themselves having to be more accountable to government....and the tax payer....scramble may not like it, but I think he's going to be very busy justifying his uni's fees both to the students they attact AND to the government, who are going to be stumping up the money initially.

i don't really like OFSTED....it's a pain in the arse, a difficult period for the staff and students in my school and in some ways has a negative impact to my teaching.....but if OFSTED don't inspect.....how does anyone know if I'm doing my job or not?

---

I don't think that the onset of proper inspection and appraisal of the courses in question is going to have everyone breathing a sigh of relief....

The core problem is that these courses are there to satisfy student rather than industry demand. There is no queue of potential employers beating paths to their local college/uni and fiercely competing for the next crop of newly graduated music technologists / music business people. Thats not to say that there isn't a need for people with a relevant education and a credible qualification, its just that there are so few real opportunities, that if the course intakes reflected actual demand, they would take on a fraction of the students. That, however, would be highly uneconomical and lead to lack of profit... not an option in any corner of todays education market.

As Narcoman has pointed out, at least one of the by products of this opportunism is that arguably, the market is flooded with people desperate to get a toehold = supply far outstrips demand, which pushes the value of skills and experience down and makes it all the harder to establish and maintain even modest income. What little research there is points uniformly to a marketplace where low income is the norm, and businesses operate hand to mouth, unable to access credit, or build the capital reserves to reinvest and develop their products and services.

There are other possible effects too: education providers take thousands of musical types out of the market for musical services for years at a time, and give them access to a huge range of facilities free at the point of use. That means they aren't using local facilities for anything other than CV destinations. To make matters worse, at least some institutions allow non students access to their facilities - sometimes as "guineau pigs", but also through outright commercial hire. In effect, they are competing directly and indirectly with private recording/rehearsal facilities - add it all together, and arguably the education sector is actively undermining one of the key areas in which their graduates seek employment.

Are there possibly wider societal effects? The music industry at its core is a highly speculative enterprise - the major labels and big indies have evolved to absorb the losses associated with a generally accepted failure to success ratio of 10:1. All these courses are basically playing the same game - the students are the currency in a gamble from which very few go on to prosper - yet like the labels, the education providers still ultimately profit. But what of those who fail? They have acquired very substantial personal debt, often paid up front by the taxpayer, acquiring skills which are irrelevant, and creating products with no tangible value. To add to this, how many will end up on benefits, or never reach the income threshold to start repaying their debt to the state?

Here in Scotland, I'd take a guess and say there are at least 1,000 students at any one time in some form of popular music related education. If that is representative of the UK, that figure rises to 10,000+. Look at it across a decade or two, and what we are talking about is astronomical amounts of money and wasted human potential, speculated on subjects supporting an industry where not only is failure the norm, but its primary product is in crisis.

Its either stark staring mad, or the second instalment of the great rock 'n roll swindle.

-------------------------
http://piethaag.bandcamp.com

It's a good debate btw.....I don't agree with the all the counterpoints that scramble has put out, but would like to say that, with de-regulation and non-standardised degree award systems there is issues with meeting standards and knowing what those standards are....

We're seeing issues in education below the higher education status - free-schools - academies - the wish for all schools to leave LEA'a and become directly financed.

What it does mean is that your child may no longer be required by law to be taught by a qualified teacher - and those that work in schools will not have set terms and conditions

the privatisation of education IMHO is a bad thing.....the privatisation of Universities equally so - and this is how I can see things going

Consumers are very, very protected by the government - we have consumer rights acts - we have sales of goods acts - we have safety standards that ALL products have to adhere to - if they don't, then they are withdrawn from sale....this must also be the same for the service industry...which education falls into.

One may not trust the current government to look after our public institutions - but then one can vote for a change in government...and who else will look after the consumer interest - the companies providing the goods?????

its a democratic state - it's not perfect - but what other option have we to regulate and protect the people from being ripped off by companies.....we're never going to have a perfect situation - but i firmly believe that a democratically elected government that can be changed by the people are in the best place to protect the people....

for universities to self-regulate and not to have independent accountability is wrong - even if it's a pain....and the reward for the University is the ability to award government recognised degree's HND's etc etc...without regulation i don't see how Universities can justify the right to award degree's..

btw Tonmeister is as recognised a standard as we can hope for in higher education - only being awarded by 10 institutions worldwide.

The argument that there are too many 'Music tech' "graduates" is not great either - if we follow that argument through then the current government are right in schools just teaching the "english Bac" - where only 5 subjects are focused upon - none of which are Arts based.....just because someone doesn't get a job in the music business, does that really mean that a standardised, regulated degree level award in Music Technology is NOT worthwhile?? - We might as well end all non-career based uni courses and all be trained as accountants.

it's only the joy of education, the pursuit of knowledge and the creativity of our nation at risk....but we still need to make sure the education system as a whole serves the purpose that it is there for....otherwise we pay for something as a nation that is worthless (and likely to be run by McDonalds - rather than respected educational institutions that can justify themselves to the government)

Edited by Wease (28/08/11 03:44 PM)

no. You just cap places. Like we used to do. When we had one of the best education systems in the world. Now go tell a spaniard you have a degree from the UK. Watch them laugh at you.


The point is - the level of academia taught in most music tech "degrees" is barely A-level.

Quote Soundseed:

---

The core problem is that these courses are there to satisfy student rather than industry demand. There is no queue of potential employers beating paths to their local college/uni and fiercely competing for the next crop of newly graduated music technologists / music business people.

---

Nail. Head.

It all started to go wrong, IMO, when universities started calling students "customers" - which is just claptrap really.


You might as well let a kindergarten playgroup determine the supply of free ice cream. It won't do them a lot of good: the short-term fun will soon give way to a lot of nausea and throwing up.

Seriously, we have colleges which are now so cowed about chucking anyone off a course (funding threat!!) that they might as well just send all the lecturers home and let the students set, and mark, their own exams for all the difference it makes.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Quote Wease:

---

What it does mean is that your child may no longer be required by law to be taught by a qualified teacher - and those that work in schools will not have set terms and conditions

---

You need to be careful about this one. When I was teaching, I worked alongside "Instructors" - teachers who lacked a qualification. They had worse terms of employment than qualified teachers, but did the same job. The only pressure to get rid of them was from the teaching unions.

No magic happens during the examination for a teaching degree that makes you a fit person to instruct a class.

Quote Steve Hill:

---

Quote Soundseed:

---

The core problem is that these courses are there to satisfy student rather than industry demand. There is no queue of potential employers beating paths to their local college/uni and fiercely competing for the next crop of newly graduated music technologists / music business people.

---

Nail. Head.

It all started to go wrong, IMO, when universities started calling students "customers" - which is just claptrap really.


You might as well let a kindergarten playgroup determine the supply of free ice cream. It won't do them a lot of good: the short-term fun will soon give way to a lot of nausea and throwing up.

Seriously, we have colleges which are now so cowed about chucking anyone off a course (funding threat!!) that they might as well just send all the lecturers home and let the students set, and mark, their own exams for all the difference it makes.

---

spot on.

narcoman and steve - you have good points - although restricting and capping those able to go to university is elitest and leads to only the rich being able to go to university....maybe an agreed standard of education to gain a degree is a better way - make the teaching good and the standards high - and have a set standard to reach before you gain the degree is a better way than the old way of money buying an education? (cause how do you decide who goes - is it decided by the school you attended and how much money your father has or the grades you got at school?)

did steve hill and narcoman go to university?....would they deny their children the opportunity to go to university? would they not prefer an open admissions policy and open standards that they knew were checked and evaluated so their children gained a decent, relevant qualification and were the best they could be - to return to the 1950's elitism of the university education system isn't the answer surely....

as for Mr wombat...there is no examination to gain QTS - you must pass a set of 32 standards assessed and evidenced over a year by the course mentor and the schools you train in who in turn are assessed by OFSTED on the quality of them teaching the teachers. It's not easy....out of the 10 people I did my training with 3 failed. you can see those standards here
Real teachers are dedicated professionals who meet these standards as well as passing CRB checks (so have zero criminal record)and who are constantly monitored, assessed, performance managed and evaluated.

I find it quite annoying that people de-value teachers, yet wouldn't be able to pass the course themselves. Teaching requires a skill and mindset that not everyone has.

It took a lot of hard work to gain my QTS

You bugger!

--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/seaapes

I'll ignore Wease's political claims because this obviously isn't the place to debate them, but I will say that the analogy with sale of goods acts is not a good one. The audits that the government used to make, and still do in some cases make, into Universities weren't concerned with anything analogous to basic safety or false advertising. They were attempts to provide a fine-grained ranking of Universities, and University departments, by looking (or pretending to look -- of course they never really did anything other than looking at tick-boxes) at a great many aspects of a department's practice. This is more analogous to the government attempting to provide a fine-grained analysis of washing machine companies, and coming up with a definitive ranking for them. The results in the case of the Universities were about as accurate and pointless as you would expect with washing machine companies. (There were proposals not so long ago for the government to provide a star-ranking system for hospitals, but that idea seems to have thankfully disappeared).

It's very easy to say "x should be government regulated". The question is, will government regulations and inspections and audits achieve anything? -- in the real world, that is, not in some idealized world where government is full of wise, disinterested angels and there aren't competing political agendas viciously raging under the surface.

>for universities to self-regulate and not to have independent accountability is wrong - even if it's a pain....and the reward for the University is the ability to award government recognised degree's HND's etc etc...without regulation i don't see how Universities can justify the right to award degree's..

Universities were successful independent institutions for many centuries, long before the government decided to take them over. Universities awarded degrees for many centuries before the government ever decided it was its job to regulate degrees. If anything the problems with the University system have set in while the government has been effectively running them.

>What it does mean is that your child may no longer be required by law to be taught by a qualified teacher

The only useful part of an education degree is the part where the student goes out into the field and gets on-the-job-experience. All those government inspections never managed to do anything at all about the fact that the people running the education departments for the last thirty years have all been actively hostile to the idea that educational methods should have a solid empirical basis (hardly surprising given that the Department of Education is full of the same sort of people -- as I said, government departments are not full of wise disinterested angels).

Quote Wease:

---

narcoman and steve - you have good points - although restricting and capping those able to go to university is elitest and leads to only the rich being able to go to university

---

It's not based on income is it? You base it on school performance. What we need is better schools....;)

Look where "everyone gets a degree" has got us.... the lowest standard of degree education in Europe. A UK degree is no longer worth squat diddly poke!

Quote Wease:

---

....maybe an agreed standard of education to gain a degree is a better way - make the teaching good and the standards high - and have a set standard to reach before you gain the degree is a better way than the old way of money buying an education? (cause how do you decide who goes - is it decided by the school you attended and how much money your father has or the grades you got at school?)

---

When I went to university you got in on grades. Buying an education? I think you're thinking of a time from long ago!!

Quote Wease:

---

did steve hill and narcoman go to university?....would they deny their children the opportunity to go to university? would they not prefer an open admissions policy and open standards that they knew were checked and evaluated so their children gained a decent, relevant qualification and were the best they could be - to return to the 1950's elitism of the university education system isn't the answer surely....

---

I'd like a return to the systems removed nearly 20 years ago. We do not HAVE an open admissions policy - we have a privatised education system of low standards with a policy of "everyone is entitled to a degree no matter what" and a focus on enticing wealthy foreign money. Far too right wing.

Both of my degrees (as most) had capped places - the first had 30 places. A capping of 500 music tech places a year nationally would be more than enough. That way you get filtered EARLY on. Instead we have 1,000s a year wasting their time and getting themselves into massive debt for NO reason.

Quote Wease:

---

as for Mr wombat...there is no examination to gain QTS - you must pass a set of 32 standards assessed and evidenced over a year by the course mentor and the schools you train in who in turn are assessed by OFSTED on the quality of them teaching the teachers. It's not easy....out of the 10 people I did my training with 3 failed. you can see those standards here
Real teachers are dedicated professionals who meet these standards as well as passing CRB checks (so have zero criminal record)and who are constantly monitored, assessed, performance managed and evaluated.

I find it quite annoying that people de-value teachers, yet wouldn't be able to pass the course themselves. Teaching requires a skill and mindset that not everyone has.

It took a lot of hard work to gain my QTS

You bugger!

---

er....I'm a qualified teacher too :-)

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

Im a qualified teacher too...

---

Good - then you'll agree it's important to keep the standards high, yes?....and qualified teacher status is important....not just for the pupils, but to protect those that work in education - and recognise their importance and skills...


I feel I'm taking over a bit - but i hope to keep this topic in the Pub Debate realms which i think it's in...

Point Blank have just as much right to provide courses as any other institution - as long as they are relevant and accredited properly.....universities may well have been independent institutions providing degrees for centuraries - but they were also privately funded....if you expect the government to pay - then they'll want results - just as students who pay want relevant results/good teaching etc.

Are the university boards also full of disinterested angels? -

Our world has changed....my families only experience of university and higher education was through my uncle - my wife's family never went or even dreamed of this standard of education

but my siblings and I all did - as did my wifes siblings (through work mainly - a chartered accountant and a chemical engineer...)and she is just finishing a degree....in music (with some music tech modules btw)) from the open university....and is qualifying as a teacher this year - through the GTP route (which is all on the job). Now is her degree not worth the paper it's written on? - I've looked and read some of her course papers and requirements - judged them against the ones I did - and they seem to match up pretty well actually.

I like the fact that more people have access to education - i think it honestly helps the wealth, well-being and health of the nation...i just want to see that education being of a certain standard. I don't see any other way of ensuring a certain standard other than independent regulation....and we have an aspiring youth who want to be the best they can be - haven't we got a duty to make sure those people get the best they can - without devaluing the education they receive, but also not restricting that access?

capping courses nationally just means restricting access - and allows non-regulated, non standard and non relevant courses being run by 'bad' education suppliers to prey on those that wern't lucky enough to get in to the courses they want. Is this not what the forum said at the begining of this topic - that Point Blank wern't offering the courses that were relevent to the industry?

It does all seem a little doom and gloom - the state of the nation isn't that bad....and music tech/the music business isn't quite dead yet.....


--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/seaapes

Edited by Wease (28/08/11 11:37 PM)

Wease - narco can speak for himself, but it's no secret round here that he has a PhD in maths...

I left a top six independent school in 1972 with A level grades exceeding an offer I had from a redbrick university to read English - and didn't go! I wanted to get a job to buy guitars and amps etc. I did however get a decent job in the the Civil Service which offered further training (in accountancy), and ended up a partner in the world's biggest accountancy firm, PwC.

In that life I've done a hell of a lot of training and teaching myself (with no formal qualifications), including at one stage ending up being senior moderator for the professional exam all insolvency practitioners have to pass, but I can confirm that PwC spends a bloody fortune on teaching actually very bright graduates simply to read and write properly.

I don't want a return to the 1950s, but there is something fundamentally wrong with the Blair target of getting 50% of kids into university. The right target should be "however many kids merit higher education, and can demonstrate the required level of educational achievement to benefit from it". It won't be 50%. It should have nothing to do with wealth. Or attracting lucrative funds from foreign students, whose fees are not capped.

One of the best single things you could do for UK students is require universities to charge no more to foreign students than they do to domestic ones (already a requirement for EU students). The only relevant entrance criteria should be merit. This year, thousands (maybe even hundreds of thousands) of UK students will not get places. Without wishing to sound like the (odious!) British National Party, every rich foreigner who has effectively bought a place has kept one of them out, and we ought to consider that to be an affront.

It's also not very good for Britain's long-term global competitiveness, is it?

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Quote Steve Hill:

---

...Without wishing to sound like the (odious!) British National Party, every rich foreigner who has effectively bought a place has kept one of them out, and we ought to consider that to be an affront.

It's also not very good for Britain's long-term global competitiveness, is it?

---

And it's statements like this which wins them followers.

Without foreign students, what would happen to fees for UK students? Couldn't it be argued that a foreign student paying £25,000 a year is actually subsidising several UK students?

Maybe we should just ban all foreigners from coming to the UK to study, forgo the huge investments their families make in the UK? Of course they don't spent money while they're here on accommodation, clothes, going out etc, as they live off the state. After all, they contribute nothing to the learning experience of the British students they study alongside and those that stay on after study have a negative impact on UK high-tech, healthcare and other industries.

Yeah, let's ban 'em. In fact, while we're at it, let's make it international law that all students must study in their country of birth.

Quote narcoman:

---

The point is - the level of academia taught in most music tech "degrees" is barely A-level.

---

And that is the nub of the problem. In fact, I would go so far as to state that it is not even at A-Level standard. Most of those with a BSc (A Bachelor of Science, no less, just let those words roll about in your head, echo off the back wall - Bachelor of Science!) in Music Technology that I have come across, cannot read a circuit diagram or a sheet of music. i.e. no music and no technology involved.

Which begs the questions

(1) What the hell were they doing for three years?

(2) Weren't those two rather modest abilities a required skill for entry to the course?

(3) How exactly do these people propose to earn a living, if they can't edit from a score, can't fix a minor repair, can't rustle-up some cables quickly and can't even understand what the musicians are talking about half the time?

People, we are going to lose our industry, if this problem is not solved and solved quickly!

I agree wholeheartedy with Red Bladder

and a standard level of education - with a known level of knowledge gained from a course can be the only way to go.....

for a music degree, you have to show competency to grade 8 of a musical instrument...thats grade 8 from one of the 3 recognised providers of the exams (ABRSM, LCM or Trinity Guildhall).

ABRSM are a registered charity - so there is our 'angels' - working for the good of the course, not for the profit.

thats how we make sure people get on a music degree on merit.....so the 'industry' needs to set a similar standard for music tech...

--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/seaapes

Quote Wease:

---

I agree wholeheartedy with Red Bladder

and a standard level of education - with a known level of knowledge gained from a course can be the only way to go.....

for a music degree, you have to show competency to grade 8 of a musical instrument...thats grade 8 from one of the 3 recognised providers of the exams (ABRSM, LCM or Trinity Guildhall).

ABRSM are a registered charity - so there is our 'angels' - working for the good of the course, not for the profit.

thats how we make sure people get on a music degree on merit.....so the 'industry' needs to set a similar standard for music tech...

---

Exactly why capped places is the right thing to do!! It doesn't create elitism if administered correctly. At the moment the likes of PB or SAE let you in on the size of your wallet. Much of the education industry "proper" is similarly based.

Quote Aftertouch:

---

Without foreign students, what would happen to fees for UK students? Couldn't it be argued that a foreign student paying £25,000 a year is actually subsidising several UK students?

---

That extra money goes into private pockets. In no way does it go into government hands (apart from a tiny bit of tax) and does not get used to support other students. I've first hand experience of the early days of that privatised sector of the biz.

There was, even in my day, a real preference for "rich foreign families". It's a foolish practise and an export of education. When you treat education as an export commodity you're on shakey ground.

Re your BNP comment : The BNP hijack that viewpoint and unfortunately pull the ignorant innocents into thinking they have a righteous stand. This has a knock on effect nullifying any useful information from monitoring the import of foreign students. As soon as you seek to cap UK uni sales of courses to wealthy families it's labelled as a "BNP initiative".

As UK citizens we (and our gov) have a mandate to look after our own population preferentially - whatever race, sex, religion or even mother tongue - but when they live here they're under our protection, and that, until the £ became more important to a university than results, used to include not exporting OUR education to people who do not live here or have any interest in contributing to the UK as a whole.

Quote Aftertouch:

---

Maybe we should just ban all foreigners from coming to the UK to study, forgo the huge investments their families make in the UK? Of course they don't spent money while they're here on accommodation, clothes, going out etc, as they live off the state. After all, they contribute nothing to the learning experience of the British students they study alongside and those that stay on after study have a negative impact on UK high-tech, healthcare and other industries.

Yeah, let's ban 'em. In fact, while we're at it, let's make it international law that all students must study in their country of birth.

---

No - we should stop charging them more and using them as a profiteering exercise which is what universities currently do. Why do you think we don't chase German or Spanish students? I draw your attention to the education trade shows outside of europe. I've been to one (in South Korea back in '94). You get paid a bonus for attracting a mega fee paying foreign student.

A few moons ago I studied Sound Engineering & Music Technology. Began by doing C&G parts 1-3, then a BTEC HND. I feel (to this day) that I had some very good tutors (one of whom used to write in the pages of SOS, I believe).

Now. The establishment was not of the cash grabbing, ‘we can give you your dreams’ type, and the tutors were very honest and vigorous when they said that “This course will not get you into Abbey Road” or “If you don’t want to work hard or turn up to classes, you can **** off”. Many did. I worked hard and got my qualifications and had an absolute ball in the process. We had access to a theatre that was run by the college, practical classes involving soldering patch bays and the like, an electronics module (should have listened harder in that one) and relentless classes with Revox machines and tape editing etc.

My point is, I think this course was better than most out there. But, it still didn’t provide me with anything near the skills to apply to any studio with a view actually getting your hands on a compressor. And it is not recognised in the industry like Tonemeister etc.

A course does not a Ken Scott make.



Go and get a proper business qualification. You’d look better in a mortar board than Mickey Mouse ears.